31 posts
8/11/2006 1:59 pm

Last Read:
4/14/2007 2:38 pm


What's the difference? Is there one? Perhaps it's a gender thing. For most guys, the answer is no. Even bad sex is still good. But for women, bad sex is, well... bad.

If a guy finishes, it's a success! It'd be interesting to find out just how many intercourse acts end with both participants reaching orgasm. That's not to say that a woman needs that payoff to have a good time. But it sure does provide the icing on the cake.

So what's the deal? Is there such a thing as bad sex? If so, whay does it entail?

Aamu3 56M

8/11/2006 2:45 pm

I don't agree with that. If I wanted to have sex where the object of the game was just to finish then I might as well just handle that myself. It's a heck of a lot easier. My goal is to try and gratify completely my partner and nothing sends me off more than when she is sent there and back again. There's no comparison at all between the two. To me that's the difference between good and bad sex.

BullVertigo 48M

11/9/2006 9:18 pm

I second the previous. The elusive dual and well timed mutual climax is such a rarity but especially blissful when attained. As such, it is common pratice for me to work my tongue muscles to exhaustion prior to attaining the ideal mutual.

For me bad sex are those thankfully rare occassions when I can't seem to elicit reciprocal enthusiasm for the pursuit of the desired experience and subsequent end. They have the awkward feeling of a courtesy fuck.

Become a member to create a blog